Using task context to improve programmer productivity

ABSTRACT

When working on a large software system, a programmer typically spends an inordinate amount of time sifting through thousands of artifacts to find just the subset of information needed to complete an assigned task. All too often, before completing the task the programmer must switch to working on a different task. These task switches waste time as the programmer must repeatedly find and identify the information relevant to the task-at-hand. In this paper, we present a mechanism that captures, models, and persists the elements and relations relevant to a task. We show how our task context model reduces information overload and focuses a programmer's work by filtering and ranking the information presented by the development environment. A task context is created by monitoring a programmer's activity and extracting the structural relationships of program artifacts. Operations on task contexts integrate with development environment features, such as structure display, search, and change management. We have validated our approach with a longitudinal field study of Mylar, our implementation of task context for the Eclipse development environment. We report a statistically significant improvement in the productivity of 16 industry programmers who voluntarily used Mylar for their daily work.

REFERENCES

• 1: Backus, J.W. Automatic programming: properties and performance of FORTRAN systems I and II. Proceedings of the Symposium on the Mechanisation of Thought Processes, The National Physical Laboratory, 1958.
• 2: Victoria Bellotti , Brinda Dalal , Nathaniel Good , Peter Flynn , Daniel G. Bobrow , Nicolas Ducheneaut, What a to-do: studies of task management towards the design of a personal task list manager, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.735-742, April 24-29, 2004, Vienna, Austria [doi>10.1145/985692.985785]
• 3: Card, S. K. and D. Nation. Degree-of-Interest Trees: A Component of an Attention-Reactive User Interface. Advanced Visual Interfaces Conference, 2002.
• 4: Robert DeLine , Mary Czerwinski , George Robertson, Easing Program Comprehension by Sharing Navigation Data, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC'05), p.241-248, September 20-24, 2005 [doi>10.1109/VLHCC.2005.32]
• 5: Robert DeLine , Amir Khella , Mary Czerwinski , George Robertson, Towards understanding programs through wear-based filtering, Proceedings of the 2005 ACM symposium on Software visualization, May 14-15, 2005, St. Louis, Missouri [doi>10.1145/1056018.1056044]
• 6: Paul Dourish , W. Keith Edwards , Anthony LaMarca , Michael Salisbury, Using properties for uniform interaction in the Presto document system, Proceedings of the 12th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, p.55-64, November 07-10, 1999, Asheville, North Carolina, United States [doi>10.1145/320719.322583]
• 7: Anton N. Dragunov , Thomas G. Dietterich , Kevin Johnsrude , Matthew McLaughlin , Lida Li , Jonathan L. Herlocker, TaskTracer: a desktop environment to support multi-tasking knowledge workers, Proceedings of the 10th international conference on Intelligent user interfaces, January 10-13, 2005, San Diego, California, USA [doi>10.1145/1040830.1040855]
• 8: G. W. Furnas, Generalized fisheye views, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.16-23, April 13-17, 1986, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
• 9: Victor M. González , Gloria Mark, "Constant, constant, multi-tasking craziness": managing multiple working spheres, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.113-120, April 24-29, 2004, Vienna, Austria [doi>10.1145/985692.985707]
• 10: Harrison, W., Ossher, H., Tarr, P., Kruskal, V. and Tip, F. CAT: A Toolkit for Assembling Concerns. Research Report RC22686, IBM, Yorktown Heights, NY, Dec. 2002.
• 11: Yoshinori Hijikata, Implicit user profiling for on demand relevance feedback, Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Intelligent user interfaces, January 13-16, 2004, Funchal, Madeira, Portugal [doi>10.1145/964442.964480]
• 12: David M. Hilbert , David F. Redmiles, Separating the wheat from the chaff in Internet-mediated user feedback expectation-driven event monitoring, ACM SIGGROUP Bulletin, v.20 n.1, p.35-40, Apr. 1999 [doi>10.1145/327556.327611]
• 13: William C. Hill , James D. Hollan , Dave Wroblewski , Tim McCandless, Edit wear and read wear, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, p.3-9, May 03-07, 1992, Monterey, California, United States [doi>10.1145/142750.142751]
• 14: Timothy Jacobs , Benjamin Musial, Interactive visual debugging with UML, Proceedings of the 2003 ACM symposium on Software visualization, June 11-13, 2003, San Diego, California [doi>10.1145/774833.774850]
• 15: Janzen, D. and de Volder, K. Programming With Crosscutting Effective Views, Proceedings of the European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming. p. 195--218, 2004.
• 16: Victor Kaptelinin, UMEA: translating interaction histories into project contexts, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, April 05-10, 2003, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA [doi>10.1145/642611.642673]
• 17: Mik Kersten , Gail C. Murphy, Mylar: a degree-of-interest model for IDEs, Proceedings of the 4th international conference on Aspect-oriented software development, p.159-168, March 14-18, 2005, Chicago, Illinois [doi>10.1145/1052898.1052912]
• 18: Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary (11th ed.), Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster. 2003.
• 19: Gail C. Murphy , Mik Kersten , Leah Findlater, How Are Java Software Developers Using the Eclipse IDE?, IEEE Software, v.23 n.4, p.76-83, July 2006 [doi>10.1109/MS.2006.105]
• 20: Murphy, G., Kersten, M., Robillard, M. and Cubranic, D. The Emergent Structure of Development Tasks. Proceedings of the European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming. p. 33--48, 2005.
• 21: D. L. Parnas, On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules, Communications of the ACM, v.15 n.12, p.1053-1058, Dec. 1972 [doi>10.1145/361598.361623]
• 22: B. J. Rhodes , P. Maes, Just-in-time information retrieval agents, IBM Systems Journal, v.39 n.3-4, p.685-704, July 2000
• 23: Martin P. Robillard , Gail C. Murphy, Concern graphs: finding and describing concerns using structural program dependencies, Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering, May 19-25, 2002, Orlando, Florida [doi>10.1145/581339.581390]
• 24: Martin P. Robillard, Automatic generation of suggestions for program investigation, Proceedings of the 10th European software engineering conference held jointly with 13th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering, September 05-09, 2005, Lisbon, Portugal
• 25: Jianqiang Shen , Lida Li , Thomas G. Dietterich , Jonathan L. Herlocker, A hybrid learning system for recognizing user tasks from desktop activities and email messages, Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Intelligent user interfaces, January 29-February 01, 2006, Sydney, Australia [doi>10.1145/1111449.1111473]
• 26: Teitelman, W. and Masinter, L. The Interlisp programming environment. IEEE Computer, vol. 14, 25--34, 1981.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.6 Programming Environments
          Subjects: Integrated environments

Additional Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.6 Programming Environments
          Subjects: Programmer workbench

General Terms:
Algorithms, Experimentation, Human Factors

Keywords:
IDE, degree-of-interest, interaction history, program views, task management